Steve

Wouldn't make any difference to me either but since when is it O.K. to take decisions like this out of the hands of the breeder .? Bloody hell in some breeds whether or not she needs a C section is the least of their worries .they cant just make these thing go across the board and not give anyone room to move if they need to.

Yep I hear you. It would be a rare breed these days which doesn't have some kind of collaboration and input from the genetic experts and breed groups already. However sometimes - most times even the experts don't agree and obviously in some cases there are a lot of obstacles to work through and not all issues can be dealt with the same way. We have a clause in our code of conduct which prohibits the breeding of close relatives without a submission to explain why they want to and what their goal is which is looked over by people who are breeders who have qualifications in genetics - so far its worked well and if I could rely on it being managed appropriately and if I really thought that some breeders would take a scrap of notice a similar situation with the ANKC would at least make it look like breeders are thinking through more than just how the dogs look before they proceed with any mating. But my concern is that I don't think they will .I think some will do as they like and tell lies. In fact Im sure of it .That for me is a much scarier thing than knowing which dogs are inbred because I can look on a pedigree and make choices on what dog I want to use with the belief that the pedigree has integrity and true ancestors are recorded. If lies are told on the registry for me it defeats the whole purpose of breeding registered dogs - to be able to accurately profile the pedigree. The popular sire syndrome has the potential to undo a breed almost over night and in this regard Mum and Dad BYBreeder have less chance of doing bad stuff to the breed than any show breeder does even if the dogs they breed are untested. But you cant avoid the fact that this is what we do. We are purebred breeders - just as any breeder who breeds purebred animals of any species.So lets put it into perspective and consider a stud bull and how many cows he may impregnate in an afternoon. A sheep breeder will have one stud ram impregnate the entire flock. How many humans know their pedigree up to 5 generations - I don't perhaps that's how I married a man who is also a carrier for the same disease I am. No denying that it needs education but you have to understand the politics and culture as well as the science.

Why ? You cant ask for this because you cant say what the breeder or breeders would be going after in their breeding program and every breed would have different goals at different times. Because it prevents individual dogs being abused (by puppy farmers) and it encourages (forces) genetic diversity. Two or three lines are more diverse than one. You assume that every breeder will want to use an "import" and that's not the case, not every breeder is blinded by the words " imported xxx " on the paperwork and many tread with caution, assess the whole dog and never go there. No, I assume that that we are talking about a hypothetical scenario (posed by Jed) where the only other option is to use a dog that carries a genetic illness. I believe it is possible to assess a dog's quality even if it is overseas. I don't care whether the dog is imported from Sweden, or "imported" from Townsville. If the breed is at such a serious bottle neck, It is important to bring in new lines. I would rather see a variety of lines available rather than one dog being overused, and ending up in every single line. Restricting service numbers would encourage this. Yes, last resort. Jed posted a horrible scenario about a breed in really bad genetic shape. There is no stud dog in Australia that isn't a carrier, and hard decisions have to be made. While I still believe that stud services should be restricted in general, if breed organisations can show why a temporary exemption should be made, that would sound reasonable to me. Especially after the explanation you gave me. In the same way that it might be reasonable to give a breed permission to open a stud book for a time. I'm not a genetic expert. However I think that genetic experts need to look at the breed as a whole rather than just the breed in this country. There would also need to be a compulsion for people within that breed to follow that plan set for them. And I think it would be harder to enforce that than it would to enforce just a straight limit of stud services. Most studs are overused by people for reasons other than the genetic health of the whole breed, so that is the main reason behind my suggestion. Overuse of stud dogs has caused problems. If people are prepared to put even more onerous voluntary restrictions on themselves in the form of breeding laws written by experts, I do believe there is a case for gaining an exemption. O.K. I mostly agree with you but no matter what if these people are considered to be good enough to be given the tag registered breeders , they do already need to pass a prefix exam - for what thats worth etc then I'm against having regulations which take the ability for the breeder to make decisions based on what is happening in their own back yard away from them. I have to admit that I do feel a bit resentful at the concept that after Ive put my life into it and studied my heart out and had the success Ive had in breeding great healthy dogs I get a bit miffed at the idea of asking someone who isn't as experienced or in my opinion as knowledgeable as me about my dogs for permission on what I can and cant breed. Now I try really hard to keep my ego out of it and only consider what is truly best for the dogs and I admit that bit is probably a bit about my own ego too - but I do think thats whats best for my dogs. Ill try and squash down that ego thing but Id be telling lies if I didnt say it is a bit on my mind.

It has to be registered in the KC of the county it lives in and is on the team representing. So If I send a limited to the US, it can not be registered there on limited because there is no system between OZ and the US to do that. So that dog could never be treated as a purebred dog, which would include being refused the right to represent the US on their world team as a purebred dog. Yet there will lots of limited registred dogs on the US team, just not OZ limited. See how it works? Well thats interesting and if true then that opens a can of worms which I may just need to tickle a bit.

Sorry Steve but you are wrong. Perhaps it's a different rule for Qld? (AGAIN! ) I have an LR paper in front of me and on the back it says: "Limited Register Regulations - A dog shall only be eligible for registration in the limited register if it is: 1) ineligible for exhibition at a conformation show;or 2) for any reason, not to be used for breeding purposes;or 3) not entire or has been desexed;and 4) not eligible for export" But T time the owner can and does still export it if they want to. The only thing the CC can do is block issue of an export certificate.

Because the ANKC says so. Yes it restricts an ANKC breeder for selling a dog they want to place on limited to an overseas home if they want to provide transferable limited papers. But the law will not see it as restraint of trade, you can still sell your puppy, you just won't do it with ANKC limited transferable papers. Your choice is yours to belong to the club and follow their rules or not. BTW almost all countires now have limited rego, so this could be done if the clubs wanted to do it. I think dogs back and forth from AKC to CKC on limited. Not sure about the UK. And there are several other registeres outside kennel club that have international recognition of other clubs limited rego for transfers. Why not, let people join the club and do activies, the dog is purebred, it is just not for breeding or show ring. No you can still export limited register puppies and dogs but the limited register is for pets so there isnt ny reason for a person to want to have an export certificate. The fact that the export certifiate is only issued to main register is because that iTs supposed to be used for people to be able to tranfer the dog from the aussie registry to the overseas one to be able to breed registered puppies and show the dog in that country. Yes and when I export a limited registered dog to the US or Canada, both of which have m limited register programs, these people can not particpate in the Kennel club activites that allow limited registered dogs like agility ( remember not all countires allow associate dogs and even other rules can apply, for example a dog cannot go on the world agility team if it is not on main or limited register of it's home country register. So why can't an Oz export get the same opertunity and if you will bennfits that all limited KC registered dogs have, just becaseu they move to another country. They should have all their rights and priviliages transferable to any KC within the limited program. So lots more going on then just dog shows or breeding. But whether the export certificate is issued or not its still on the limited register of its home country or does home mean where it lives rather than where it was born?

Most of you know that if there is some reason to beat up the CCs Im the first to say so but in the case of stopping registered breeders from exporting puppies via dealers or selling to pet shops, or restricting how many they can breed its not fair to blame them and each time we start to talk about it pages and pages go on until we end up in the same place. Its the same conversation with the same things being said as it was when we decided the ONLY way we could make a distinction between breeders who do and those who dont was to set up a separate org which was under a business entity which allowed them to say their members wouldnt do it. It was why we set up the MDBA from day one the way we did and nothing has changed.

Well that would depend on which country you were exporting to some have 12 weeks some - most have 8

The export pedigree is registered to him therefore his name appears in our journals. So there is a point where all these dogs are officially "his". I just want to qualify my "employees" comment by saying there are certain prefixes - and we all know them - which are breeding exclusively for McDougal. They are Australian-based breeders, paid by him to get what he needs as far as pups are concerned and I *believe* he sets up individuals and pays them well to keep raising these litters and registering pups under their own prefix and solely exporting the litters to McDougal. Over the years, I have only ever occasionally seen an "outsider" - or more "insider" someone within the dog world - export to McDougal. No I think you have it a bit wrong there - any breeder can sell their puppies to Transpet and there isnt any need for him to set up breeders and pay them because they just accept puppies from everyone who wants to sell them. the reason you only see a certain few shipping a lot is because only a andful really do but apart from that some regsitries over sease accept the blue papers as all they need and dont require an export cert so thise ones dont show up in the export lists. Lots go out via Sydney and Perth and export cets from the CC are never applied for so those never show up anyway.

Because the ANKC says so. Yes it restricts an ANKC breeder for selling a dog they want to place on limited to an overseas home if they want to provide transferable limited papers. But the law will not see it as restraint of trade, you can still sell your puppy, you just won't do it with ANKC limited transferable papers. Your choice is yours to belong to the club and follow their rules or not. BTW almost all countires now have limited rego, so this could be done if the clubs wanted to do it. I think dogs back and forth from AKC to CKC on limited. Not sure about the UK. And there are several other registeres outside kennel club that have international recognition of other clubs limited rego for transfers. Why not, let people join the club and do activies, the dog is purebred, it is just not for breeding or show ring. No you can still export limited register puppies and dogs but the limited register is for pets so there isnt ny reason for a person to want to have an export certificate. The fact that the export certifiate is only issued to main register is because that iTs supposed to be used for people to be able to tranfer the dog from the aussie registry to the overseas one to be able to breed registered puppies and show the dog in that country.

The export certificate isnt a licence - all it gives is a registration paper for change of owner or chage of residence to one in another country just exactly as it does when an owner changes address or changes ownership within Australia. In NSW we register the pup into the breeders name and then the owner changes it into their name when they get the papers .The only difference is that in this case the owner lives over seas. The NSW Cc doesnt know we are getting the rego papers to export the pup - they tell us we have to register all pups so we do. You miss the point. MacDougal does this for the respectability. It doesn't matter what it actually does, it's the appearance of it. If he doesn't get the papers, he doesn't get the veneer of respectability that he obviously wants. O.K. But how to you stop him from getting the papers ? By then they are his dogs and he can have the rego papers changed over to him because he is the new owner. He may even put them in under the new owner who buys them from him for all we know. Come to think of it he probably does - because thats how it works with breeders who sell to Austalian pet shops. Breeders only sign the back of the rego papers not who the owner is so at any point there after the papers can be filled in by any owner and issued via the CC. I'm sorry we have been talking about how the ANKC should be able to do these sorts of things for ever and it always comes back to they cant . There isnt any point in siting what can be done in other countries or what ethically or morally should be able to happen .Our federal laws take precedence and they are different to other countries.

Because they think it makes them look good. I dont know why they cant say in the code of ethics, no sales to pet shops or to wholesalers. How much weight does a code of ethics have in a legal sense in that they're not actually restricting trade because if the breeder doesnt agree with it, they just let their membership to the CC lapse and sell to whoever they want anyway. They cant because its already been tested and they have recieved legal advice telling them they shouldnt do it. there isnt any point in it constantly being discussed .Its the main reason the MDBA set up with the business entity we did. Its the same as Vic Govt saying if someone is a Vic dogs member they get exemptions - because its assumed that the org they give exemptions to have certain standards.

I wrote this way back in the thread: http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?s=&a...t&p=4975666 They don't have to grant the export licence. MacDougal hides behind the veneer of respectability and advertises that he gets his dogs from registered breeders. The CCs can stop that. It's not a restriction of trade, they're simply not granting the licence. After all, it's not needed to export. The export certificate isnt a licence - all it gives is a registration paper for change of owner or chage of residence to one in another country just exactly as it does when an owner changes address or changes ownership within Australia. In NSW we register the pup into the breeders name and then the owner changes it into their name when they get the papers .The only difference is that in this case the owner lives over seas. The NSW Cc doesnt know we are getting the rego papers to export the pup - they tell us we have to register all pups so we do.

I cant see that either AQIS or RSPCA would have any reason to reduce the figures. If they were going to do a fiddle, then I rather think they would have INFLATED the stats. In any case many of the pups that go in bulk to Hawaii are already ANKC registered so they are already included in that very tiny ANKC slice of the pie. They are not all ANKC reg'd dogs in the shipments because (last time I looked) the crossbred white fluffies were still holding their very high market value for him. Souff I wasnt trying to imply the RSPCA had deliberately reduced the figures - but its hard to believe what they were given thats all.

As long as they are PIAA accredited, breeders can sell to pet shops and wholesalers. Code of Ethics for dogsnsw A Member shall not: (a) sell any dog to commercial dog wholesalers or retail pet dealers, who are not accredited by the Pet Industry Association of Australia Limited (PIAA). I dont know what their process is if a breeder is caught selling to non PIAA members Well that very rule blows the restraint of trade idea right out the window. Why can they restrain them to only selling PIAA shops, it still is restraining. This rule is here because they think it sounds more ethical then saying yes our breeder supply the pet shops, so have made a rule about it to soften the sound of it. No one is fooled. And if they want to take a real stand on this issue not just give it lip service, they could also make a rule that said ANKC members can not sell any dog to any commercial dog wholesaler or retail pet dealers. End of blaming ANKC breeders for this welfare issue and we can proudly make a clear statement that we do not particiapte in that industry. Shortstep. This has all already been tested in court and legal advice has told them it cant be done . Allowing them to restrict to a PIAA members is supposed to limit the ability to do that - back when it first came in in NSW there were only 2 in the state.Since then Transpet has become a PIAA member and numbers of PIAA pet shops has obviously risen. It was the best compromise they had because they couldnt stop them selling to a pet shop or an agent across the board. What is the point in continuing to call to stop things which they cant stop. They cant stop an owner exporting their puppies and by the time the pup is exported the breeder is no longer the owner. When they start looking at stopping selling to someone like transpet its not just the members they have to answer to - its the agents and pet shops because they are restricting their trade too. Its cant be done under current federal law - they know this because its been tested .

Is breed an issue? I would imagine if you came here the difference between my beagles and maremmas would be huge.

Just wanted to clarify that ANKC breeders by our rules cannot export until the pup is 11 weeks old. The government rule is 8 weeks of age. So if an ANKC breeders sends a pup overseas at 8 weeks they are breaking the code of conduct and should be dealt with. they dont by then the new owners export them not the breeder. The breeder sells the pup to the buyer - transpet who ships them out the next day. The export certs are put in when the pup is 12 weeks old. Simple.

I may as well talk about this here as Im after everyone including breeders being involved in the conversation if they are interested. Here is one of the biggest issues. For ever we have heard "the betterment of the breed" the Canine Councils codes say we are not to breed only for the commercial or pet market. Im too lazy to look up the exact wording but that is about what it says. So lots of breeders who show dogs think that means that they will breed show dogs and the betterment of the breed means having a priority of breeding dogs which ft the breed standard in looks and temperament. They wont sell a good pup to someone who wants to breed a pup who wont be showing it because for them thats evidence they are not interested in the better ment of the breed. Lets say hypothetical - because its recently been debated here on this forum and isnt this easy anyway especially in this breed due to MVD incidence but for the sake of an example. If I decided I wanted to breed cavs and I wanted to put the show ring on hold if I had to for a while in order to breed cavs which had less or no chance of having SM. My main selection criteria may be only using scanned dogs with an A score but obviously if I started with only scanned A dogs which were also great examples of the breed and the best choices for breeding dogs whch looked the part as well as being clear of SM that would be a better start and potentailly better for what im doing as my part for betterment of the breed. If I can only get dogs which are not that posh in regard to the breed standard or temperament then when its done its a much more difficult chore to have dogs which are clear but also an asset to a breeding program because its closer to fitting the breed standard. You try explaining that and getting the breeders to even consider you may be going to breed for the betterment of the breed because for them if you are not going to show the dogs, or if you are going to be breeding more than average to try to get it right you are a flthy puppy farmer. Those watching and counting how many puppies are being registered without them being shown have a field day. I have worked on 3 issues like this over 35 years which were occurring in my dogs and I have been successful in eliminating them and in the middle I bred some ugly dogs and then went back to basics to breed better dogs according to the standard and they gained their championships. But anyone from the show ring watching me would determine I was breeding without concern for the betterment of the breed and only for money. I wish. These are issues which make a purebred breeder different to any other breeder because anyone can breed a champ or a pet but doing that and ensuring they are also healthy consistently for generations to come is what stands us apart and its why Im really concerned about 'experts' who only see the issue as what the current litter is all about .Im also concerned that the true meaning of betterment of the breed has been altered and is now seen to mean nothing more than champions. Thats part of it but not all of it.

I think tt means the breeders that sell to him. Oh I get it .

We get this stuff from the pet control man . Spray it around and it stops flies outdoors for about 4 months even if it rains etc. We spray it around the bar be area etc and never have a fly in sight.

Thanks, this is what I was trying to get to in my last post but you've said it better. :D The above rule is similar in every state. The CCs being "toothless tigers" once again springs to mind. Federal trade restrictions can't stop a club having rules and regs - isn't it simple that members who don't abide by the rules be chucked out?? I don't believe we need more rules and regs - just enforce the ones we've got! I do Steve and I totally agree with your example. Getting back to exports - I do object to the sheer volume of pups exported *to* McDougal particularly as they are entire puppies on the ANKC Main Register - please tell me how that is ethical? I really can't see that the *employees* he sets up in Australia are doing anything for the breeds they pump out. Again - what employees ?

The RSPCA got the figures of exported dogs form AQIS for the round table conference and they only showed about 11,000 and that includes all of those going out without papers and cross breds etc . I thought it would have been way over that and I know several years ago it was much higher. I challenged the figures but thats what AQIS gave them. Perhaps its not as big an issue as well feel like it is ??? Stil dont believe em.

Define betterment of the breed.

No can do - go email. [email protected]

I wont use an AI frozen or other wise. I can name you at least three breeds where the dogs rarely have sex as dogs do anymore and cant reproduce without human intervention and there isnt a chance anything here gets to make babies unless the boy can get it up and get it in . Dogs tell you when they shouldn't be mating before any X ray or test does. Crook hips wont hold their weight either. One breed has been doing nothing but AIs for over 15 years - hip scores are huge, most have to be given progesterone to maintain the litter , really high incidence of C sections and they suck as mothers. then the breeders take a bow because inthe year 2010 the more you interfer with mating and whelping the better the breeder you are. Ais are good if its for a genetic clear you need for one generation but its a last resort for me.